Hooker v. Hhs
02-472
| Fed. Cl. | Jun 21, 2016Background
- Petitioners Brian and Marcie Hooker sought Vaccine Act compensation for their son SRH, alleging thimerosal-containing vaccines caused or significantly aggravated his autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
- Petition filed May 10, 2002; key vaccines at issue include a May 26, 1999 DTaP/Hib/OPV visit (Petitioners allege aggravation) and earlier thimerosal-containing shots (alleged initial causation). Petitioners later added an alternative "significant aggravation" theory after Respondent moved to dismiss as untimely.
- Medical records show developmental concerns and abnormal Denver II screenings well before May 10, 1999; treating and Respondent experts placed onset of neurodevelopmental problems prior to the vaccine date that would start the limitations period.
- Petitioners submitted multiple expert reports (Drs. Stephen Smith, Mary Megson, Mark Geier, Boyd Haley, Janet Kern, others); Respondent submitted three medical experts (Drs. Bennett Leventhal, Edward Cetaruk, Gerald Raymond).
- Special Master Hastings found (1) the initial-causation claim untimely under the Vaccine Act statute of limitations, and (2) both initial-causation and significant-aggravation theories unsupported on the merits — rejecting Petitioners’ experts as relying on inaccurate factual assumptions and finding Respondent’s experts far more persuasive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of initial-causation claim | Hooker: first symptoms occurred after May 26, 1999 (within limitations) | HHS: contemporaneous records and expert review show symptoms before May 10, 1999; petition filed >36 months after onset | Held: initial-causation claim untimely; symptoms manifested before limitation cutoff, so claim barred |
| Causation-in-fact (thimerosal → ASD) | Hooker: thimerosal exposure can cause or exacerbate ASD; experts opine vulnerability (genetics/mitochondrial dysfunction) | HHS: reliable literature and tox experts find no credible mechanism or epidemiologic association; Petitioners’ studies and experts are flawed | Held: Petitioners failed Althen prongs; no preponderant evidence that vaccines caused SRH’s ASD |
| Significant aggravation by May 26, 1999 vaccines | Hooker (alternative): May 26, 1999 vaccines significantly aggravated preexisting ASD (fever/regression) | HHS: medical records show no proximate regression/fever as alleged; experts find no mechanism or evidence of aggravation | Held: Significant-aggravation claim rejected — factual assumptions contradicted by records and experts’ opinions unpersuasive |
| Need for evidentiary hearing / weight of expert testimony | Hooker implicitly requested to proceed; submitted written reports | HHS: moved to dismiss and challenged experts; emphasized OAP precedents rejecting thimerosal theories | Held: No hearing held; Special Master exercised discretion to decide on written record given weak/contradicted petitioner evidence and extensive contrary precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Althen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 418 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir.) (establishes three‑part causation test for off‑Table vaccine claims)
- Pafford v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 451 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir.) (interprets Althen prongs as addressing general ‘can cause’ and specific ‘did cause’ inquiries)
- Capizzano v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 440 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir.) (circumstantial evidence may satisfy Althen elements)
- W.C. v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 704 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir.) (endorses Loving framework for off‑Table significant‑aggravation claims)
- Cedillo v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 617 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir.) (affirming special master rejection of MMR causation theory in OAP test-cases)
- King v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 608 F.3d 610 (Fed. Cir.) (discusses scrutiny of expert methodologies and OAP findings)